International Journal of Retina and Vitreous (Aug 2024)

Historical and practical aspects of macular buckle surgery in the treatment of myopic tractional maculopathy: case series and literature review

  • Francyne Veiga Reis Cyrino,
  • Moisés Moura de Lucena,
  • Letícia de Oliveira Audi,
  • José Afonso Ribeiro Ramos Filho,
  • João Pedro Romero Braga,
  • Thais Marino de Azeredo Bastos,
  • Igor Neves Coelho,
  • Rodrigo Jorge

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00578-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Uncorrected myopia is a leading cause of blindness globally, with a rising prevalence in recent decades. Pathological myopia, often seen in individuals with increased axial length (AXL), can result in severe structural changes in the posterior pole, including myopic tractional maculopathy (MTM). MTM arises from tractional forces at the vitreoretinal interface, leading to progressive macular retinoschisis, macular holes, and retinal detachment (RD). This study aims to outline preoperative evaluation and surgical indication criteria for MTM, based on the MTM staging system, and to share our Brazilian experience with three cases of macular buckle (MB) surgery, all with over a year of follow-up. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of three cases of MTM-associated RD treated with MB surgery, with or without pars plana vitrectomy. Preoperative evaluations included optical coherence tomography (OCT) and ultrasonography (USG) to assess the extent of macular involvement and retinal detachment. Surgical indications were determined based on the MTM staging system. The MB was assembled using customizable and accessible materials. Surgical procedures varied according to the specific needs of each case. An informed consent form regarding the surgical procedure was appropriately obtained for each case. The study was conducted with the proper approval of the institution’s ethics committee. Results All three cases demonstrated successful retinal attachment during the mean follow-up of eighteen months. In the first case, combined phacoemulsification, vitrectomy, and MB were performed for MTM with macular hole and RD. The second case required MB and vitrectomy after two failed RD surgeries. In the third case, a macular detachment with an internal lamellar hole was treated with MB alone. These cases highlight the efficacy of MB surgery in managing MTM in highly myopic eyes. Conclusions MB surgery is an effective treatment option for MTM-associated RD in highly myopic eyes, providing long-term retinal attachment. Our experience demonstrates that with proper preoperative evaluation and surgical planning, MB can be successfully implemented using accessible materials, offering a viable solution in resource-limited settings. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to validate these findings and refine surgical techniques.